A WELDER was yester­day awarded over $100,000 following the lawsuit he filed against the State after a 2016 drunken driving charge was dismissed against him when the police submitted a test result slip in the name of a woman, and bearing the wrong date.The man, Narace Dwarpaul, sued the State for wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution.He was represented by attorneys Ramesh Deena and Christian Deena while attorney Rachael Jacob represented the State.The judgment was delivered by Justice Robin Mohammed.It was on June 11, 2016, the welder was heading home when he was stopped during a routine police exercise along the M2 Ring Road in La Fortune.He was charged with failing to provide a breath specimen for ana­lysis contrary to the Motor Vehicle and Road Traffic Act.During the trial before the ma­gistrate, the police officer tendered a test record with the name of a wo­man and the year 2015. The officer insisted it was the correct record.The magistrate found the welder not guilty and he filed the lawsuit in 2019.In his witness statement, the 38-year-old claimant stated that he was stopped by the police officer. He said that he had not consumed any alcohol that night and that he blew into the breath test instrument, as instructed, but was told he was wasting police time.He denied being shown any test results but said he was handcuffed, taken to the police station, placed in a dirty cell for about seven hours, and was also denied a phone call.The State’s two witnesses were the Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) in charge of the road traffic exercise and the constable who laid the charge.The constable, in his witness statement, said the vehicle was stopped by another officer but that he spoke with the claimant.He stated he suspected the man was driving under the influence of alcohol and the man admitted that he had consumed alcohol.The officer stated that the field sobriety test gave a reading of 91 microgrammes, which was above the 35 microgramme legal limit.He said that the man agreed to do a road breath test but described him as sucking on the mouthpiece and moving around his head.On the three occasions, the results of the readings were “void”. The offi­cer said he showed the man each of the readings.The officer further contended that the man was allowed to make four telephone calls from the scene and, at the police station, he was offered another but refused.He said the claimant was placed in a newly painted and well-maintained cell and he was by himself.The ASP, in his evidence, stated that the man was stopped by an officer, the test was conducted and he was taken to the police station.Under cross-examination, he said the claimant was not handcuffed and that the four telephone calls were made at the police station.Mohammed noted these two inconsistencies, saying they were not trivial but go to the core aspects of the arrest and treatment of the claimant.The judge also noted that the tendering of the erroneous test results with the woman’s name and 2015 date was of grave concern.Mohammed found that the absence of reasonable and probable cause for the prosecution had been proven as the claimant had pointed to the failings in the constable’s investigation and evidence.He further found that the officer did not have an honest belief in the claimant’s guilt based on reasonable grounds.“He lacked sufficient, reliable information to conclude that the claimant had committed the offence. The absence of contemporaneous records, the missing test slip, the failure to call the initial officer, the internal inconsistencies, and the erroneous test record all point to a prosecution not founded on reasonable and probable cause.“The court finds that the claimant has proved on a balance of probabi­lities an absence of reasonable and probable cause,” the judge stated.It was also found that the police constable acted in malice and Mohammed stated that, “The inference is that he was prepared to use questionable means—inclu­ding an erroneous test record—to secure a conviction. I find that it is an improper and wrongful motive.”The judge awarded the claimant general damages of $85,000, with interest at the rate of 2.5% per annum from 2020 to 2026.It was also ordered that the State pay special damages in the sum of $7,500, with interest at 1.5% per annum from 2017 to present.The judge did not award aggravated and exemplary damages but ordered that the State pay the claimant’s costs.The Deenas were in­structed by attorney Vish­wanath Rambaran while Jacob was instructed by attorney Sara Muslim.